And you are assuming that we may not need them to survive. Thats a fairly large assumption IMO. Just look at the FA breakdown of animals. I haven't seen any evidence of a culture aimed to eliminate PUFA and am not aware of any science showing that it is necessary for good health.

I have seen many studies and epidemiological accounts of people who eat more fish having better health markers than those who do not.

There is absolutely an upper limit and there is concern about ratio, but to say they are completely unnecessary is a HUGE leap of logic.

No assumptions. I know for a fact that we don't need to eat fish or take fish oil to survive. If omega 3 is necessary, there is clearly enough in the other meats and vegetables we eat to meet the demand. Even the worst diet in history, the standard American diet, keeps us alive into our 70's and 80's. We're living longer than ever despite the worst eating habits ever, and since I feel my diet is superior to the SAD the overwhelming majority of people eat, I'll take my chances not supplementing with some potentially rancid oil. Fish oil = snake oil as far as I'm concerned. I strongly doubt it's the fish keeping people alive longer. Seafaring societies have a lower instance of grain and vegetable oil consumption as well and I'm hedging my bets that that is the reason why they live longer and not the fish.

Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

Inflammation causes CHD. Inflammation is primarily caused by too much polyunsaturated fat and lectins in foods. If you have a low intake of PUFA, you're going to have a lower risk of CHD. There are plenty of studies confirming that a diet high in omega 6 is very inflammatory.

Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

A lot of people get bored on or need more than meat, fish, fruits & veggies over time. I'm not saying they "need" nuts. But many/most people are not hardcore & eating some nuts & other not so great but ok foods in moderation, allows them to stick w/ this WOE, then that's a good thing imo. Imo, it's why Mark has expanded & relaxed some on what is/isn't primal: to reach out to & be adoptable & doable for a lot more of the population. One of his goals is to reach, if I recall it correctly, 10 million people to adopt primal living. It's better to eat some nuts, than get bored or burned out on a more narrow WOE for many people who aren't so creative or don't have access to wide varieties of veggies,fatty fish or may never eat offal.

Not daily, but when I want it, I take cod liver oil, fermented, which HAS BEEN CONSUMED for a long long time by Scandinavian peoples. No prostate cancer rates there out of normal expectations for western populations elsewhere not consuming this oil. If I ate more fatty fish & had a history of low PUFA in my diet I'd likely not supplement. But I don't eat as much fish & seafood as I'd like to, so I do....

In my refrigerator, I have a jar of almond butter, a jar of organic peanut butter, 1 lb of raw cashews, 8 oz of raw pecans, 1 lb of California walnuts, 1 lb of raw hazelnuts and 1 lb of raw almonds. I eat nuts. I love nuts. I just don't eat them daily, I've never sat down with a spoon and a jar of nut butter and I don't snack on them. Hell, I don't snack, period. I throw a handful of them on my salad, occasionally chop them coarsely and use them as a breading or use them for a very rare cheesecake crust or toss them in ice cream. Lettuce makes up a higher caloric percentage of my diet than nuts. It's all about overconsumption, and I try and stay light on the foods easy to overconsume.

Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

Inflammation causes CHD. Inflammation is primarily caused by too much polyunsaturated fat and lectins in foods. If you have a low intake of PUFA, you're going to have a lower risk of CHD. There are plenty of studies confirming that a diet high in omega 6 is very inflammatory.

What about stress or lack of good sleep, or enough time for sleep? There are many causes for inflammation in the body, chronic injuries, even extreme or sudden exercise. There are others I'm not thinking of...?

Diet is not the lone cause of people's health maladies, though it is major factor, no doubt.

No assumptions. I know for a fact that we don't need to eat fish or take fish oil to survive. If omega 3 is necessary, there is clearly enough in the other meats and vegetables we eat to meet the demand. Even the worst diet in history, the standard American diet, keeps us alive into our 70's and 80's. We're living longer than ever despite the worst eating habits ever, and since I feel my diet is superior to the SAD the overwhelming majority of people eat, I'll take my chances not supplementing with some potentially rancid oil. Fish oil = snake oil as far as I'm concerned. I strongly doubt it's the fish keeping people alive longer. Seafaring societies have a lower instance of grain and vegetable oil consumption as well and I'm hedging my bets that that is the reason why they live longer and not the fish.

Actually it is a complete and total assumption. Whether or not that assumption is backed by any relevant data is the question. IMO its not. You need to not spread your argument in twenty different directions at once. You specifically said limit PUFA....not to limit rancid fish oil. Both you and Ray Ray are off the deep end if your quest is to completely eliminate (or near zero) the PUFA in your diet to the extent that you would even consider a fatty piece of fish as less healthy than a lean piece.

In my refrigerator, I have a jar of almond butter, a jar of organic peanut butter, 1 lb of raw cashews, 8 oz of raw pecans, 1 lb of California walnuts, 1 lb of raw hazelnuts and 1 lb of raw almonds. I eat nuts. I love nuts. I just don't eat them daily, I've never sat down with a spoon and a jar of nut butter and I don't snack on them. Hell, I don't snack, period. I throw a handful of them on my salad, occasionally chop them coarsely and use them as a breading or use them for a very rare cheesecake crust or toss them in ice cream. Lettuce makes up a higher caloric percentage of my diet than nuts. It's all about overconsumption, and I try and stay light on the foods easy to overconsume.

I get it, you're not an anti-nut nut... But unlike you, many people in transition to primal, hell, many people doing primal for a while do snack too. So we agree that nuts are ok snacks in moderation, as long as they are fresh & de-lectin'd by whatever method of prep one chooses. I personally dislike the roasted effect on my soaked nuts, so I just soak my whole walnuts &/or slightly sprout my almonds & peel 'em.

I'm still not convinced fermented fish oil is, by default, a bad thing. Rather I take it coz I think it's a good thing, 1 capsule if I eat @ cafo meal once in a while to sorta balance things out, at least on a o36 basis. Again, moderation.

Hard to justify CAFO, but there are some on a budget that mostly eat it & still call themselves primal, coz of the no/low lectin, low toxic approach espoused here. It's about progress, not perfection, imo.

I'm one of those people in transition to primal from a mostly vegan diet (not a junk food/soy vegan but a whole foods/sprouted grains/fermented foods vegan). I still rely on nuts for snacks. And actually, I'd love more info on sprouting nuts as Betorq mentions. And I was about to order some FCLO as I previously took vegetable based supplements (flax, etc). I'd love more info on FCLO.

I'm sure that as I continue to adapt to this lifestyle, I'll make better choices and learn more. But my little bag of almonds saved me at the movie theatre on Saturday when the rest of my group was eating candy and popcorn.

Seems like you are asking for a study that shows (proves?) that PUFA's oxidatively degrade and cause CHD/CVD. I don't think this study exists because I have been looking for it ever since I found this forum. Chris Masterjohn wrote an article that referenced a study which showed oxidized LDL was absorbed by macrophages which in turn formed foam cells whereas unoxidized LDL did not. This may be as close to what we are looking for as we are going to get.

Originally Posted by jimhensen

Maybe the study doesn't exist because pufas don't cause CHD.

I suggest you both read this study (yes, a legit study not an opinion piece):

Design: A split plot/change over dietary study where half the volunteers consumed a diet containing 5% PUFA (low PUFA) as food energy for 4 weeks and after a 6 week washout period consumed a 15% PUFA (high PUFA) diet for another 4 weeks. The second group of volunteers completed this protocol in reverse. Total fat, carbohydrate, protein and vitamin E contents of the diets were constant.

Subjects: 10 healthy, non-smoking, male volunteers aged 32.6±1.7 y

Results: There was a significant increase in whole blood oxidised glutathione (P<0.05), an index of oxidative stress, after consumption of the high PUFA diet. Moreover, urinary thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS), an index of lipid peroxidation, significantly increased (P=0.038) following consumption of the high PUFA diet and decreased (P=0.031) after consuming the low PUFA diet. However, there was no change in non specific plasma indices of lipid peroxidation, conjugated dienes and TBARS, nor in red cell antioxidant enzymes glutathione peroxidase, glutathione reductase, and catalase. However, superoxide dismutase significantly decreased (13%, P=0.018) after consumption of the low PUFA diet. Total cholesterol increased by 13% (P=0.014) after consumption of the low PUFA diet.

Conclusions: This study indicates that although increasing dietary levels of PUFA may favourably alter cholesterol profiles, the same dietary changes may adversely affect some indices of lipid peroxidation. Care should be taken when providing dietary advice on PUFA intake and an adequate intake of antioxidants to match any increased PUFA may be important for preventing oxidative stress.

The takeaway: since macronutrients were held constant, when PUFA was decreased, saturated fat and monounsaturated fat would have had to have increased to maintain the proper macros. The study definitively shows increasing PUFA to be inflammatory. However, the study makes an error and only references "total cholesterol." Because of the pro-inflammatory effects of the PUFA, the only logical conclusion that can be drawn is that adding PUFA decreases good cholesterol, which would explain the decrease in total cholesterol.

But we should all know by now that low blood cholesterol is not healthy. The statistics are solid, but the adjectives used in the analysis is what must be ignored. The numbers can't be argued but don't buy into the whole "favorably alter cholesterol profile" BS. That is an opinion. There is a difference.a

PUFA's increase inflammatory markers: definitively shown by the study for these ten individuals.
PUFA's favorably alter cholesterol profile: completely unsubstantiated opinion that the study actually shows otherwise and should be disregarded as fiction with an agenda.

That's the takeaway.

Last edited by ChocoTaco369; 07-24-2012 at 10:21 AM.

Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.